Husband, Family Members Can’t Treat Woman Like Slave Just Because She Is A Psychiatric Patient: Orissa High Court

first_imgNews UpdatesHusband, Family Members Can’t Treat Woman Like Slave Just Because She Is A Psychiatric Patient: Orissa High Court Sparsh Upadhyay8 Feb 2021 7:50 PMShare This – x”Even the allegation of psychological illness of the complainant-victim does not give the petitioner and his family members the right to treat her like slave bereft of any mercy and human compassion.” : Orissa High CourtWhile denying Regular Bail to a Husband booked for allegedly subjecting her wife (complainant-victim) to cruelty, the Orissa High Court last week observed that a woman can’t be treated like “slave bereft of any mercy and human compassion” just because she is allegedly a Psychiatric patient. The Bench of Justice S. K. Panigrahi specifically observed, “Even the allegation…Your free access to Live Law has expiredTo read the article, get a premium account.Your Subscription Supports Independent JournalismSubscription starts from ₹ 599+GST (For 6 Months)View PlansPremium account gives you:Unlimited access to Live Law Archives, Weekly/Monthly Digest, Exclusive Notifications, Comments.Reading experience of Ad Free Version, Petition Copies, Judgement/Order Copies.Subscribe NowAlready a subscriber?LoginWhile denying Regular Bail to a Husband booked for allegedly subjecting her wife (complainant-victim) to cruelty, the Orissa High Court last week observed that a woman can’t be treated like “slave bereft of any mercy and human compassion” just because she is allegedly a Psychiatric patient. The Bench of Justice S. K. Panigrahi specifically observed, “Even the allegation of psychological illness of the complainant-victim does not give the petitioner and his family members the handle to treat her like slave bereft of any mercy and human compassion.” The matter before the Court The petitioner-Husband filed the instant application under Section 439 of CrPC seeking bail in connection with a case registered in connection with the alleged commission of offences punishable under Sections 498-A (Husband or relative of husband of a woman subjecting her to cruelty), 294 (Obscene acts and songs), 323 (Punishment for voluntarily causing hurt), 307 (Attempt to murder), 506 (Punishment for criminal intimidation), 34 of I.P.C. As per the prosecution’s case, the Complainant/Victim/Wife got married to the present petitioner-Husband on 20th February 2015. After two years of marriage, she was allegedly subjected to cruelty seeking demand for more dowry of Rs.10 lakhs and threatened to burn her alive in case of refusal of the same. Pursuant to consistent demand and cruelty meted out to the daughter, the complainant’s father gave further Rs. 2-4 lakhs over a few instalments. It was further alleged that on 06th June 2020 at about 11 P.M. her husband along with mother-in-law and sister-in-law of the informant-victim abused her and assaulted with her with a sharp wood threatening to take her life. Allegedly, her mother-in-law and sister-in-law applied ‘baidanka’ (plant with poisonous spores) to her private part and subsequently, the petitioner-Husband poured kerosene on her and set her to fire. However, she threw the burning apparels and fled from the spot and somehow saved herself and thereafter, the complainant lodged the FIR. Court’s Observations Regarding Petitioner’s counsel’s submission that the complainant is a psychiatric patient, the Court made the observation that this fact doesn’t give her husband and family members the right to treat her like a slave. The Court, while observing that that the investigation in the case is still going on, opined, “From perusal of the FIR, it appears that offences under the Indian Penal Code, are prima facie definitely made out, though it requires thorough trial. A perusal of the FIR and charge sheet filed in the present case shows that there are very specific allegations against each of the family members of the petitioner who are arrayed as accused.” The Court further said, “Upon reading of the FIR and the charge-sheet as a whole, it is not possible to come to the conclusion that they do not make out even a prima facie case against the petitioner for the offences in question.” Lastly, the Court remarked that the length of detention of the petitioner is not a ground to release him on bail in this kind of offence which shakes the social fabrics. In view of the above, the Bail Application was accordingly dismissed. Case title – Dipak Bhutia v. State of Odisha [BLAPL No.5701 OF 2020] Click Here To Download JudgmentRead JudgmentNext Storylast_img read more